Comments on: Coal industry front group touts benefits of strong emissions regulations

By: Kathryn Schwartz

Kathryn Schwartz — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:11:34 +0000

It amazes me that the television news media has been so lax in reporting on ‘clean coal’ and all the problems it represents- the Tennessee spill as an example, but it certainly does impress me that the online alternative news sources- such as yourself- are making sure that there’s a dialogue occuring on this issue, whichever side you fall on it. However, should you (like me) believe that there is no such thing as clean coal, it is imperative that we add action to words and fight for clean energy solutions that are, in fact, clean. http://www.powerpastcoal.com is a coalition of many groups dedicated to fighting the misinformation about clean coal. It’s a great website that details the push for 100 Days of Action in 100 Days to Power Past Coal. You can add events in your community to increase awareness and participation, or you can use the site to merely access the multitudes of information available about the myth of clean coal.

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:05:24 +0000

So we’re supposed to gamble on the eventual commercial success of CCS, and proceed with building more coal-fired power plants? The coal industry may be investing in IGCC, but that’s no guarantee that those plants will be able to implement CCS at reasonable cost. Do we “know” it will be commercially successful/cost-competitive with other green alternatives within a decade or so? If not, who gets to pay? I’d need to see more specifics before I could support putting many eggs in that basket.

By: David with ACCCE

David with ACCCE — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:02:38 +0000

You’ve misrepresented our position!

ACCCE does support a mandatory federal plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — provided we simultaneously work to protect energy security and keep energy costs affordable for consumers. Striking this balance will require hard work, but it can be done.

We know that coal has a big role to play in the future, even with the possibility (even likelihood) of future carbon regulations.

That is why investing in advanced clean coal technologies for the capture and storage of CO2 is so important, and we call upon groups that might not have supported coal R&D in the past to reconsider their position on that point.
For more information, take a look at our 12 legislative climate change principles for federal carbon management legislation:
http://www.cleancoalusa.org/docs/beyond/

By: naught101

naught101 — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:25:28 +0000

I don’t think “they did it before, so they can do it again!” is a particularly… true mantra. The six pollutants that they mention are not really products of the energy-production process, but by-products made when impurities in the coal are burnt. You can’t compare them with CO2 (and of course it’s irresponsible for the coal industry to be claiming that coal power is 75% cleaner these days, since those emissions aren’t a very large fraction of the total emissions, and the rest is nearly all CO2).

They can’t do it again, because CO2 is an integral part of the process. The only two options are to bury the by-products, which seems immoral, especially where leakage is concerned, and will have limited potential anyway, or switch to another source.

I appreciate that the “they did it before, so they can do it again!” call is shoving them up against a wall of their own creation, however it won’t work, and it just gives them another stalling tactic in the long run.

[JR: They can do it, actually. But it requires biomass cofiring.]

By: John McCormick

John McCormick — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:18:50 +0000

“77 Percent Cleaner,” except when CO2 is a concern.

Coal fired plants, in 2007, contributed half of the grid’s electic power and 2.083 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere. In 2000, those plants emitted 2.072 billion tons of CO2.

We are running our coal plants harder today than yesterday to keep up with increasing electric demand.

The coal plants put 1.976 trillion kilowatt-hours of power into the grid in 2000. In 2007, their power to the grid increased to 2.034 trillion kilowatt-hours.

John McCormick

By: Richard Pauli

Richard Pauli — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:54:27 +0000

Time to look at the history of the tobacco industry PR campaigns.

“Now with the Micronite Filter ! ”

[Surgeons General Warning: Combustion of coal without proper filtration...]

By: paulm

paulm — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:03:09 +0000

Climate Change devastation by a 1000 cuts….the world is slowly drowning
(in certain areas)

Fiji floods: ‘Where is all this water coming from?’
http://globalvoicesonline.org/ 2009/ 01/ 12/ fiji-floods-where-is-all-this-water-coming-from/
Fiji’s military government declared a state of emergency and imposed dusk-to-dawn curfews in some parts of Viti Levu, Fiji’s main island, after torrential rain caused flooding reportedly three meters high that destroyed countless homes

By: paulm

paulm — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:47:20 +0000

There is going to be a tipping point in the next 18 months to electric cars.

Will the green infrastructure be there to cope or will this become another green disaster tipping point as more coal is consumed?

By: Brewster

Brewster — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:34:42 +0000

Oh, about the song: Don't give up your day job... [JR: The scare thing is, from the "original" I only changed "clean coal technology" to "clean air regulations"!]